Politano, M.

English

ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst

University of Massachusetts AmherstScholarWorks@UMass AmherstInternational Conference on Engineering andEcohydrology for Fish PassageInternational Conference on Engineering andEcohydrology for Fish Passage 2014Jun 9th, 3:50 PM - 4:10 PMModeling of a non-physical fish barrierM. PolitanoUniversity of Wisconsin - MadisonFollow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conferenceThis Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Fish Passage Community at UMass Amherst at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage by an authorized administrator ofScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact scholarworks@library.umass.edu.Politano, M., "Modeling of a non-physical fish barrier" (2014). International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage.66.https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conference/2014/June9/66MODELING OF A NON-PHYSICAL FISH BARRIER M. Politano and J. Martin. IIHR -  Hydroscience & Engineering. The University of Iowa.    Y. Lai and M. Bender. US Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation.   D. Smith. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  Introduction • The migration of salmonids in the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers is of great environmental interest. Several fish species are listed are threatened or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act.  • Juveniles encounter alternative pathways during migration to the Pacific Ocean. Passage through the interior Delta decreased the survival of juveniles. Fish diversion into the Delta may result in delayed migration, elevated risk of predation, exposure to poor water quality conditions, and mortality in pumping facilities.  Behavioral Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence   BAFF combines three stimuli to deter fish from entering an undesirable pathway without restricting flow:   • Bubble curtain   • Low-frequency sound   • LED modulated intensity lights  Objectives • Develop bubble, sound and light models  • Implement the models into a CFD code       using a modular approach   • Validate the model against several well-known experiments   • Simulate a BAFF to predict bubble, sound and light fields and evaluate effects of the barrier on the river hydrodynamics  pisoFoamBLS Bubble Module  • Mixture model      • Bubble number density    • Bubble velocity    • Gas volume fraction    Bubble Model 0mu∇ ⋅ =( ) Rel m l m m m m mu u u P gtρ ρ τ τ ρ∂  + ∇ ⋅ = −∇ + ∇ ⋅ + + ∂   2 3 03 8Dgr rCP k u uR − ∇ + + =   2tgN u N Nt Scν∂  + ∇ ⋅ = ∇ ∂bbmNαρ=Bubble model predictions and experiments Sound Model • Classical formulation (Lighthill, 1978): wave equation based on compressible Navier-Stokes Equations:    • Alternative formulation: energy formulation based on the acoustic energy W, the acoustic energy flux I and dissipation D   • The following relations are proposed to obtain an equation in W:       𝜕𝜕2𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖2 − 𝑐𝑐−2 𝜕𝜕2𝜕𝜕𝑡𝑡2𝑃𝑃 = 𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕𝑡𝑡−𝜕𝜕𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑖𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖+ 𝜕𝜕𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖 ~ 𝑐𝑐−2 𝜕𝜕2𝑃𝑃ℎ𝜕𝜕𝑡𝑡2 𝜕𝜕𝑊𝑊𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕= −𝛻𝛻 ∙ 𝑰𝑰 − 𝐷𝐷 𝑰𝑰 = −𝑫𝑫𝑾𝑾 ∙ 𝛻𝛻𝑊𝑊;    𝐷𝐷 = 𝜎𝜎𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 Sound Model – Diffusion and attenuation coefficients • Diffusion coefficient based on architectural models (Picaut et al. 1999): • Anisotropy related to length-scale of domain, an diffusion proportional to sound speed, with proportionality constant dependent on boundary reflectivity.    • Attenuation coefficient simplified model based on emission frequency, sound speed and void fraction 𝜎𝜎𝑊𝑊 = 0.0124 𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑐𝑐𝛼𝛼 (MKS, isothermal)   𝐷𝐷𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥ℓ𝑥𝑥= 𝐷𝐷𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦ℓ𝑦𝑦= 𝐷𝐷𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧ℓ𝑧𝑧= 𝐷𝐷3𝐷𝐷 ~ 𝑐𝑐 𝑫𝑫𝑾𝑾 = 𝐷𝐷𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝟎𝟎 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝐷𝐷𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝟎𝟎 𝐷𝐷𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 Validation of Sound Model Implementation  • A cube with 100 m on the side was simulated. A one m3 sound source at the cube center and variable distribution of gas volume fraction were included.  • Isotropic diffusion tensor and length scale as the source dimension were used.   Sound level with a sound source at the origin  Effect of diffusion parameter Effect of bubbles Effect of bubbly region Sound Model - Validation • Experiments of Wusig et al. (2000):  sound from a pile driving hammer in shallow water, with and without bubble curtain without  bubble curtain with bubble curtain Light Model • Classical model : Radiative Transfer Equation  • Integro-differential equation, on position x and direction Ω is too expensive to solve numerically for the present application    • Alternatives models • P-N models  • Approximate direction dependence using orthogonal series of spherical harmonics • Valid for high attenuation/scattering conditions • Superposition of elementary solutions (planar, linear and point sources) • Valid for low scattering conditions Ω𝛻𝛻𝐿𝐿 𝒙𝒙,𝜃𝜃,𝜑𝜑, 𝜆𝜆 = −𝑐𝑐E 𝒙𝒙, 𝜆𝜆 𝐿𝐿 𝒙𝒙, 𝜃𝜃,𝜑𝜑, 𝜆𝜆 + � 𝐿𝐿 𝒙𝒙,𝜃𝜃′,𝜑𝜑′, 𝜆𝜆 𝛽𝛽𝑠𝑠 𝒙𝒙,𝜃𝜃′,𝜑𝜑′,𝜃𝜃,𝜑𝜑, 𝜆𝜆 𝑑𝑑Ω′4𝜋𝜋  +  𝑠𝑠E 𝒙𝒙,𝜃𝜃,𝜑𝜑, 𝜆𝜆  variation of spectral  radiance L absorption 𝑎𝑎E  and scattering out 𝑏𝑏E  of beam scattering into beam external source Light Model - P-1 model • Simplest of P-N models.  • Radiance approximately by        𝐿𝐿 𝒙𝒙,𝜑𝜑,𝜃𝜃 ~ 14𝜋𝜋𝐿𝐿 0 + 3 𝐿𝐿 1 cos𝜑𝜑 + 𝐿𝐿 2 sin𝜑𝜑 cos𝜃𝜃 + 𝐿𝐿 3 sin𝜑𝜑 sin𝜃𝜃 ,        𝐿𝐿 0 = 𝐸𝐸, the scalar irradiance  • Effectively results on diffusive-like equation for irradiance E,    • Valid for “thick” optical media, 𝑎𝑎E + 𝑏𝑏E  ℓ ≫ 1, with ℓ a characteristic length-scale   −�𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖13 𝑎𝑎E + 𝑏𝑏E 𝜕𝜕𝐸𝐸𝜕𝜕𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖3𝑖𝑖=1 = 4𝜋𝜋𝑠𝑠E − 𝑎𝑎E𝐸𝐸 Light Model: Superposition of elementary solutions • Elementary solutions • Planar source: 𝐸𝐸(𝑧𝑧) = 𝐸𝐸0exp(−𝐾𝐾𝑧𝑧)  • Point source: 𝐸𝐸 𝑟𝑟 = 𝑠𝑠02𝑠𝑠2𝐸𝐸0exp −𝐾𝐾𝑟𝑟  • Elementary solutions can be represented numerically by solving 𝛻𝛻 ∙ 𝐮𝐮𝐄𝐄𝐸𝐸 = 𝑆𝑆E − 𝐾𝐾𝐸𝐸, with imposed ‘advective’ 𝐮𝐮𝐄𝐄. • Scattering by media cannot be modeled, only attenuation, valid for ‘thin’ optical media • Reflections from boundaries can be included if the reflection direction distribution is imposed and discretized • Examples of possible boundary conditions are • specular reflection • Lambertian cosine law (diffuse reflection) • Partial transmission  Light Model: Scattering and attenuation coefficients  • For modeling purposes it was assumed that all attenuation was caused by the water and dissolved solids and all scattering by the bubbles  • Attenuation coefficient  • Scattering coefficient • Non-interacting (dilute) scatterers : 𝑐𝑐dilute = 34 𝛼𝛼𝑅𝑅 • Interacting scatterers (VF > 8%): 𝑐𝑐E = 𝛾𝛾𝑐𝑐dilute, 𝛾𝛾 = 1 + 32 𝛼𝛼 − 34 𝛼𝛼2 𝐾𝐾𝐷𝐷 = 𝐾𝐾𝑤𝑤+𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 + 𝐾𝐾𝑠𝑠 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠 + 𝐾𝐾𝑠𝑠 𝐶𝐶𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 Validation of Light Model Implementation – Closed Cavity  Normal sunlight Dimensionless Irradiance Sunlight with a zenith angle Attenuation of radiation by medium         Reflection No reflection  No attenuation Validation of Light Model Implementation – Closed Cavity  Dimensionless Irradiance Normal sunlight   No attenuation Point sources Validation of Light Model Implementation – Contours of Irradiance with P1 Model α = 0.01 α = 0.02 α = 0.05 α = 0.1 α = 0.01 α = 0.02 α = 0.05 α = 0.1 Water-air interface Fully reflecting Simulation of a BAFF Fish Barrier in a Quiescent Medium – Bubble distribution and velocity vectors Fish Barrier in a River– Bubble distribution and velocity vectors Streamlines colored by acceleration Quiescent Medium  River Fish Barrier in a Quiescent Medium – Sound energy Fish Barrier in a River– Sound energy Fish Barrier – Sound energy attenuation Fish Barrier – Irradiance Quiescent Medium  River COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS 

Modeling of a non-physical fish barrier

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1573&context=fishpassage_conference

Modeling of a non-physical fish barrier

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst